Post navigation

Association of Professional Flight Attendants president Laura Glading told members Thursday that American Airlines appears firm that it won’t negotiate for a better contract for flight attendants.

Laura Glading

“My discussions with the company – and there have been many – have confirmed that they are unwilling to make any moves that would in any way signal to our workgroup, as well as all the other groups on the property, that a No vote would result in anything other than what was promised: arbitration within the parameters outlined in the NPA,” Glading said, referring to the negotiations protocol agreement.

“I have been pushing for mediation and the possibility of discussing any and all possible relief but the company will only agree to meet to discuss arbitration protocol,” she told members in a letter.

In a vote counted Sunday, APFA members from American and merger partner US Airways voted 8,196 to 8,180 against a tentative agreement that had been worked out by APFA and company negotiators. The proposal would have combined the two carriers’ contracts under a single contract.

According to a memo of understanding and the NPA, the airline and union are to send unresolved contract matters to binding, third-party arbitration if the flight attendants turned down the deal. That arbitration is scheduled to begin Dec. 3, with hearings to wrap up by Dec. 30.

“It is time to start preparing for the next steps,” Glading said in her letter. “We need to put our absolute best foot forward in arbitration. It is imperative that we work together on creating the best possible outcome.”

The Association of Professional Flight Attendants put out this hotline Tuesday night, and seems to be designed to squelch any rumors that the union and American Airlines will reopen contract talks in advance of binding arbitration in December:

“The company has responded to APFA’s request for mediation and has agreed to meet. The parties are in the process of scheduling meetings for next week. The company has made clear that mediation will be restricted to narrowing the issues to be presented in arbitration and determining the arbitration protocol.

“As soon as the dates are finalized, APFA will update the membership.”

By a 16-vote margin, APFA members have voted down a tentative agreement negotiated with Aemrican. Per a previous agreement, unresolved issues will now go to third-party, binding arbitration.

Since we on Monday posted 10 possible reasons that Association of Professional Flight Attendants members voted against a tentative agreement, we’ve received a handful of emails from flight attendants or family members to discuss the rejection of a tentative agreement.

We received this one overnight from one flight attendant:

You are correct Terry. There are a lot of reasons and you hit on several of them.

But for me personally, the reason that I voted NO on this Tentative Agreement was because we were told that Profit Sharing was “built into the raises” in this T.A. That was incorrect, a distortion, or outright LIE – depending on how you choose to look at it.

I have a sister who flies for Delta, who will receive the exact same pay rates as was contained in this contract offer PLUS an 15% of earnings in Profit Sharing.

The AA-APFA Agreement had no profit sharing.

Remember Delta is receiving the same pay raises as this proposal contained PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 15% of their pay in profit sharing ON TOP OF the raises that we were presented with.

This contract was clearly not even “industry standard” – let alone “industry leading.”

Further, there were A LOT of additional post-bankruptcy concessions contained in AA’s proposal – we were never given the valuation of those additional concessions and were told by our Union that those numbers were “confidential.”

What was painfully apparent to most NO voters was the fact that the Company offered $82 Million in pay raises with one hand, and turned right around and took back $82 Million in work rule and productivity concessions with the other hand.

Hope that helps you understand a little bit more about WHY we voted NO.

And here’s one from this morning from the spouse of an American Airlines flight attendant:

Great article but you, as well as every other journalist commenting on “WHY”, has completely missed the point of why. It’s actually quite simple. Both Management and the APFA were pounding the table on this being an “INDUSTRY LEADING” contract which is a total mischaracterization of the facts. If you really want to be a contributor and deliverer of real news, please start by first doing your job and ferret out the “real” facts. Go ask both the company and Laura Gladding to explain (in irrefutable and validated) detail how it was industry leading – You need look no further than Delta and Southwest Flight Attendants to realize that is a completely incorrect and incompetent statement. APFA, once again, lost sight of what their members wanted and needed. Isn’t it amazing what Delta Flight Attendants are able to accomplish and enjoy, and all without representation. In summary Terry, just ask yourself one simple question…. If the contract was so good and industry leading – then why did they turn it down?

My answer to letter writer #2, with some amendments:

First, you should consider that airline reporters don’t have any skin in the game. It’s irrelevant to us whether the contract passes or fails, or whether it’s a good contract or a bad one in the eyes of one side or the other. We just report on the outcome of the vote and its potential impact for readers.

If we did want to make an independent judgment of how the rejected contract compared to the contracts of other airlines, we’d need a team of labor specialists, accountants and cost analysts to dissect the contracts of all the carriers. You can’t point to simply one thing or another – pay rates, health insurance premiums, profit sharing or scheduling – to make that comparison. You have to cost out everything.

What is hardest to cost out is the impact of work rules, scheduling, duty rigs, etc. It’s generally believed that Delta and Southwest work rules are more productive (and less favorable to flight attendants) than those of United, Continental and American. That enters into the cost of the various contracts and the determination of “industry-leading.” That’s where the team of experts would come in. If given the choice, I don’t think AA flight attendants would accept the Southwest contract or the Delta way of working and compensating its flight attendants. But we’ll never know. Maybe they would.

I think many American Airlines and US Airways flight attendants thought of these contract negotiations and the tentative agreement in terms of the traditional contract talks under Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act. In that case, if a tentative agreement failed, the two sides could resume talking until there was an agreement or they reached an impasse.

That’s not the case here. We don’t have amendable contracts at the end of their terms. Both American and US Airways are operating under contracts with years to go on them. This is a non-RLA negotiation to get a joint contract covering both carriers’ employees, and the process was spelled out in a memorandum of understanding before the merger.

That MOU set a deadline to get a joint bargaining agreement; required that the disputed items would go to binding arbitration if the union rejected a tentative agreement; and set a $111 million limit in added economic value to the current contracts if there wasn’t a consensual agreement.

Perhaps flight attendants who voted didn’t believe that the MOU would be enforced. Perhaps many thought that the union and company would simply sit down for a new set of talks and that AA management would bring more money to the table.

It remains to be seen if that happens. There’s no sign that’ll happen. However, the two sides are going to mediation in advance of arbitration. You never know.

But if the MOU is enforced, the contract that comes out of binding arbitration is going to provide less value to AA-US flight attendants than the one they turned down. The union and company said the rejected contract gave flight attendants $193 million in added value, versus the $111 million ceiling on an arbitrated contract. One can accept those figures or reject them, but there they are. If that is the outcome, a majority of American and US Airways flight attendants turned down a contract they considered bad to get a contract that, in monetary value, will be worse.

One other thought: American management has every incentive to make peace with flight attendants. But if it backs away from the flight attendant MOU, it may be telling the other unions that they don’t need to worry about their own MOUs, that in the end the company will cave. That’s probably not the message management wants to send. That’s the problem with going first – you set the precedent, one way or the other.

Association of Professional Flight Attendants president Laura Glading told flight attendants Sunday that she was “devastated” by the narrow loss of the proposed contract, but that it’s now time to start working on the arbitration case.

For those wondering if she was thinking of resigning, Glading wrote: “It has always been, and continues to be, an honor to serve the APFA membership.”

Here’s her hotline message:

“To my fellow Flight Attendants,

“Like many of you, I was devastated by the results of the T/A balloting today. It is extremely disappointing to see the improvements our membership was set to receive rejected by such a narrow margin. However, the APFA is above all a democratic organization and the will of the membership is paramount.

“As has been made clear, the Negotiations Protocol Agreement requires that we submit the outstanding contractual issues to binding arbitration. This week, the Joint Negotiating Committee will begin preparing the case we will present to the arbitration panel. Although the NPA limits the value of the arbitration award to “market-based in the aggregate,” our team is going to do everything possible to protect our work group. The arbitration is set to begin on Wednesday, December 3rd. In the meantime, we are all going to put our heads down and prepare the best possible case.

“What is most important to remember as we go forward is that we are one united work group with one united goal: to improve our lives and livelihoods. And improve them we will. The nature of the agreement we reached with management guarantees that we meet the pay and benefits of our peers at United, Continental, and Delta. While we cannot reach the value of the T/A in binding arbitration, no Flight Attendant will be harmed by the arbitrated contract.

“As always, stay tuned to the APFA Hotline for important information and developments.

“It has always been, and continues to be, an honor to serve the APFA membership.”

* Nine of American’s 16 hubs voted in favor of the contract, but the ones that voted against were very against. In Miami, American’s second largest base, 63 percent of the flight attendants turned down the contract.

* US Airways’ biggest hub, Charlotte, rejected the deal, as did its Washington, D.C., base. However, Phoenix and Philadelphia approved the contract, led by Phoenix’s 65.4 percent “yes” vote. The Phoenix “yes” margin was the biggest among the 20 AA and US bases.

* One might argue that ex-Trans World Airlines flight attendants killed the tentative agreement. The St. Louis base voted 90-15 against the contract.

US Airways and American Airlines pass each other at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport in this April photo.

Association of Professional Flight Attendants members voted down a tentative agreement that would have combined the contracts of American Airlines and US Airways flight attendants, the union said Sunday.

The dispute now goes to binding arbitration.

APFA said 8,180 voted yes and 8,196 voted no. AA and US combined have more than 24,000 flight attendants. Of those, 20,986 were eligible to vote, meaning that 78 percent of the eligible voters cast ballots.

Said the union in a brief message to members shortly after 10:30 a.m. Sunday:

“As per the Negotiations Protocol Agreement, the outstanding issues (those issues reached in the final days of bargaining) shall be submitted for binding arbitration. Our first date for arbitration is Wednesday, December 3rd. Until the arbitration is completed and the new contract is awarded, each legacy workgroup will continue to work under its current contract: the LAA Conditional Labor Agreement and the LUS ‘Red Book.’”

“We are, of course, disappointed with today’s outcome,” American said in a statement. “This tentative agreement included industry-leading pay and benefits, and would have provided considerably more economic value and much better work rules than the contract that will be determined by arbitration.”

The contract had come under sharp criticism by many flight attendants who didn’t like various parts of the deal worked out by management and union negotiators.

But the union had warned that the proposed deal provided $193 million in added value to the flight attendants of the two airlines, while the maximum added benefit in an arbitrated decision would be only $111 million.

The $111 million represented how much more the flight-attendant contracts of competing carriers – Delta Air Lines, United Airlines and its Continental Airlines – were worth more in average that the existing American and US Airways contracts.

A “memorandum of understanding” signed before the 2013 merger said that a joint agreement would give flight attendants an industry-standard contract. The $111 million represented what the two sides had calculated was needed to make a joint contract comparable to those at the other airlines.

American said the joint collective bargaining agreement that will come out of the arbitration hearings “will be imposed without ratification—meaning flight attendants won’t have any say in the process. Next steps are to meet with the APFA to prepare for that arbitration process, which is scheduled to begin next month.”

As it so happens, I’ve received several emails today from American Airlines flight attendants who are unhappy with the tentative agreement upon which they are voting.

Then, this afternoon, their union posted a special hotline telling them that turning it down wouldn’t improve things.

The joint negotiating committee of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants issued a letter laying out how its members saw the situation:

“Eight months ago, our Joint Negotiating Committee came together with the difficult task of blending two contracts, two distinct cultures, and two very different operations. Comprised of seven LAA and seven LUS Flight Attendants, our team forged a strong unity as we worked through our differences. Together, we reached an agreement which will benefit all 24,500 Flight Attendants at the New American Airlines.

“For five intense months of negotiations, our JNC confronted management against a backstop of binding arbitration. Our team squeezed every possible dollar from this company, compromised only when absolutely necessary, and achieved the best contract possible. We have no doubt that ratification of this Tentative Agreement is the best course for Flight Attendants at the New American Airlines.

“Rumors abound that there will be more negotiations or that by voting No we can miraculously retain profit sharing or somehow force the Company to abandon the implementation of a single medical plan for 120,000 employees at the New American. As the Flight Attendants directly involved in bargaining we can tell you this is not the case. Voting No will simply result in at least $82 million annually in cuts to the T/A. The arbitration will focus on whether the cuts should come out of areas such as wages, vacation days or 401(k) contributions. That is a predicament we strongly urge you to avoid.

“This is an industry-leading agreement in pay provisions and work rules. We are not asking that you agree with every single provision of this T/A. Rather, we ask you to focus on the key question we had to constantly ask ourselves during these negotiations: whether this Tentative Agreement is better than the alternative of binding arbitration? Here we believe there is no room for doubt.”

With ballots to be counted Sunday, we’ll have to wait and see whether the majority of flight attendants like or accept the proposed deal or can’t stand it.

There are currently separate contracts for American Airlines flight attendants and those from merger partner US Airways. The joint contract would put both groups of flight attendants under the same provisions.

Among comments I’ve received in recent weeks, was this: “Several thousand of us APFA flight attendants are very unhappy with the change of heart that the company and union leaders have had in regards to getting us a better contract after 11 years of concessions,” one flight attendant wrote me. “The vote for the current Tentative Agreement is not going well. It is dividing us and making us very angry.”

A long, long “open letter” to APFA leadership passed on to me included this section:

“Each of our contracts separately were negotiated off bankruptcy. The joint proposed contract reflects that in the work rules and pay. We are not in bankruptcy anymore. Far from that. Actually, we are more profitable than ever. Ticket prices have gone up, and oil prices have gone down. It is hard to imagine why you would negotiate for a contract that would essentially give us a pay cut. It is almost impossible to believe, but we are offered similar pay as 10 years ago, without added pay raise to incur for the cost of living. We are offered contractually 9 days less of vacation than flight attendants in our airline enjoyed 20 years ago. Negotiating based on past profit does not represent the market today. We have flight attendants who have been here 40 years and did all they could in their power, for their entire career, to gain the great benefits and flexible work rules that we currently hold. Giving it up is a slap in the face for all flight attendants who have been taking these pay cuts for over a decade, and anyone who comes into the industry further down the line. You have done a great disservice to us, and we will no longer have it.”

An underlying question is whether the flight attendants can get a better deal by turning down the contract and going back to the table. APFA leaders have firmly told the membership that won’t happen (although management has agreed to at least one change since the tentative agreement was first announced).

A “memorandum of understanding” signed prior to the 2013 merger said that if union members turned down a tentative agreement, “the parties shall immediately submit their dispute to final and binding arbitration.”

That arbitration “shall be for the purpose of achieving a joint collective bargaining agreement that is market-based in the aggregate.”

In an Oct. 29 hotline, the union put up its outside counsel, Roger Pollak, to argue that it won’t get better during arbitration.

In the video, Pollak said the proposed contract adds $193 million annually in value to flight attendants beyond the current American and US Airways contracts.

If the contract is turned down, the arbitration panel would be limited to a ceiling of $111 million as it considers what flight attendants should get, $82 million less than what’s in the contract, Pollak said.

The $111 million is “market-based in the aggregate”: the average value of the Continental Airlines, United Airlines and Delta Air Lines contracts above that of the American/US Airways contracts.

There have been some news items involving airlines and their unions, so let’s put them together in one item.

Upset American Airlines flight attendants start petition drive to recall their president

Almost as soon as the Association of Professional Flight Attendants leadership had agreed to send out a tentative agreement to members, we started hearing of unhappiness with the proposed deal.

The contract, which would replace separate contracts by American and US Airways flight attendants, goes to a vote later this month for 30 days.

Some flight attendants have begun a petition drive to remove APFA president Laura Glading. The petition, launched last Saturday, has drawn 1,194 signatures as of 12:40 p.m. Friday.

Comments seem to be from a mixture of people who don’t like the contract, don’t like Glading or don’t like Glading and the contract.

UPDATE with Glading comment: Glading and other top union officials are conducting road shows to explain the proposed contract to members. On Friday, she dismissed the petition drive.

“There have been petitions to remove the APFA president since we were flying 707s – at least that long. But the truth is, we’ve been on the road this week in two of our largest base cities – New York and Chicago – as well as Boston, and the enthusiasm for this T/A is palpable,” Glading said.

“Flight attendants are showing up with great questions and the more they learn the more they like what they hear. This agreement leads the industry by a wide margin and the vast majority of flight attendants are excited to vote ‘yes,’ ” she said.

American Airlines pilots pledge not to allow changes to its scope clause

In American Airlines’ bankruptcy, management forced pilots to accept a lot more regional jets with more than 50 seats, up to maximum of 76 seats, flown by regional partners rather than AA pilots.

In a pronouncement this week, the Allied Pilots Association board of directors – including new base officers from the US Airways bases sitting at the table – said it won’t accept any change in the upper ceiling of 76 seats or to its “scope clause,” “scope” referring to the scope of flying that AA pilots do.

The union said it gave that message to American chairman and CEO Doug Parker. Said the union in a Wednesday message to members

“As a board, we are united concerning Scope. We understand and share your concerns prompted by senior management’s recent comments about our industry-standard 76-seat limit on regional affiliate aircraft. Management has indicated a desire to dilute that limitation and obtain a below-industry-standard Scope Clause in the ongoing joint collective bargaining agreement negotiations.

“This afternoon, the full APA board met with American Airlines CEO Doug Parker. Our conversation with Mr. Parker was frank and cordial and covered a wide range of items. Foremost among them: We informed him that APA will not agree to any Scope concessions. Our actions now concerning Scope will help define the profession for the balance of our careers and for the next generation of aviators, and we are committed to securing industry-leading pay and work rules.

“With the merger of American Airlines and US Airways succeeding beyond the most optimistic forecasts, management needs to address APA’s priorities concerning quality of life, work rules, and pay and benefits. Our pilots’ sacrifices, our efforts on the merger’s behalf and the vital role we play in the airline’s success must be appropriately acknowledged.”

In a follow-up message Thursday, APA said American has asked for more time to finish up negotiations on a joint collective bargaining agreement that covers the American and US Airways pilot groups.

Southwest Airlines executives have talked publicly about the need to sign labor contracts that have productivity improvements or other cost savings that offset the expense of higher pay and such for savings.

In a Sunday negotiations update to flight attendants, Transport Workers Union Local 556 president Audrey Stone wrote the idea of a cost-neutral deal isn’t acceptable to the union.

“While we will continue to recognize that as Southwest Airlines Employees we must position ourselves to enter the global aviation market, we will forge ahead and not waiver in our insistence that a ‘cost-neutral’ Contract is unacceptable. These are lines in the sand that must not be crossed,” TWU 556 told members.

Southwest chairman and CEO Gary Kelly, speaking at a North Dallas Chamber of Commerce session last month, said Southwest still has relatively low costs, but not on labor. That’s why the airline is focused on tightening things up.

“So there’s an opportunity there. And the nice thing is there as in every organization, there’s waste, there are inefficiencies. There are rules that were put into place decades ago when we were a short-haul airline. Now, we’re an international airline and a lot of those things just don’t fly.

“The other thing that’s happened is that through bankruptcy, our competitors’ work rules have changed. That just puts us in the position of asking the question: What do we do about that? We want to work with our employees to figure what changes we might want to make that would make us more competitive in order to grow and preserve our jobs.

“On the pay side of things, our pay is outstanding, and we have wonderful opportunities to share record profits with our people. That’s just a terrific place to me. It’s far different than being in labor negotiations when we know the pay is low. There is very low pay in the airline industry, but that is certainly not the case at Southwest. It’s a win-win.

“We have opportunities to improve Southwest Airlines’ competitiveness and job security, and at the same time increase rewards for our people.”

Stone told members in her update that the union and airline have agreements on a number of items.

“While I am cautiously optimistic about our progress, there are obstacles ahead. We are eager to ‘open’ discussions on Article 21 (Compensation), and the outstanding Articles that relate to compensation. If our bargaining sessions with Management continue to remain productive, we foresee this happening very soon,” Stone wrote.

Alaska Airlines and the Association of Flight Attendants announced Thursday that they’ve got a tentative agreement. It approved, it’s a five-year deal dating from the 2012 amendable date.

The AFA leadership has to approve the deal before it would be sent to members for a vote.

“We are delighted to have reached a tentative agreement that recognizes the outstanding contributions of our flight attendants and will provide for enhanced productivity for the future,” said Ben Minicucci, Alaska Airlines’ executive vice president of operations and chief operating officer. “Our sincere thanks to the negotiating team from the Association of Flight Attendants for their patience and creativity as we worked to resolve issues raised in the prior agreement.”

“The Association’s negotiating committee is pleased with the results of the parties’ bargaining efforts and we are looking forward to presenting this tentative deal to leadership for approval,” the AFA master executive council president at Alaska, Jeffrey Peterson, said in the Thursday announcement.

American Airlines flight attendants will have a chance soon to vote on a new contract that its union says is the best in the industry.

The executive committee of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants voted Wednesday to send the proposed deal, announced last week, to flight attendants this fall. The APFA board of directors supported that decision, the union said in a Wednesday night hotline to its members.

It said that the tentative agreement offered “industry leading total economic value combined with the best work rules in the industry,” worth “$193 million over the combined value of our current contracts.”

The deal, if approved by the flight attendants, would replace separate contracts for American and US Airways flight attendants. American and US Airways merged last December, although they still operate as separate airlines and separate brands.

The “top of scale” pay will go to $53.52 an hour, up from $49.05 for AA flight attendants and $47.62 for US Airways flight attendants. It’ll hit $58.50 for domestic flight attendants and $62.25 for international flight attendants by the contract’s final year.

The hotline doesn’t spell out the contract’s length. But we’re told it’s a five-year contract. With an anticipated date-of-signing of Dec. 1, that would indicate an amendable date of 2019.

The proposal has 2 percent pay raises for years 2, 3 and 4 and a 3 percent hike for the final year of the contract. Also, the pay ladder has been shortened from 15 years to 13 years, meaning that flight attendants will get to the top pay rate quicker. Of course, the flight attendant corps is very senior, meaning that many are already at that step.

The tentative agreement has improvements for vacation, holiday pay, per diem pay, training pay, deadheading pay and other particulars.

In some cases, the proposal handles AA and US flight attendants differently so that the deal won’t move them backwards, such as on health insurance.

What happens if flight attendants reject the tentative agreement during the upcoming vote this fall? Says the APFA:

Should the T/A fail a ratification vote, the economic terms of our contract (wages, premiums, sick, vacation, medical and 401(k)) will be decided in final and binding arbitration. As the Negotiations Protocol Agreement states, the arbitration panel will be required to establish a contract that is at least equal in value to the current LUS and LAA CBAs – “the floor” – and is market-based in the aggregate (defined by United, Continental, and Delta) – “the ceiling.” To reach the ceiling, the current combined costs of the LAA and LUS contracts would have to be increased by $111 million. The total value of the T/A is $193 million. The difference – $82 million – is the negotiated premium above what could be achieved in arbitration.

American Airlines passenger service agents have voted to be represented by a coalition of the Communications Workers of America and International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

AA’s agents, who staff the gates and counters at airports and handle reservations, had voted down the CWA in 2013, prior to the Dec. 9 merger of US Airways and American.

But their US Airways peers are currently represented by the CWA-Teamsters coalition, and their employees combined with American’s employees to approve the CWA-IBT association as their union.

The CWA said that of the 11,187 voting, 86.2 percent of the airport and reservations employees had voted for the CWA-Teamsters coalition: 9,640 for, 1,547 against.

American has about 9,000 employees in the class, joining about 5,500 from US Airways, for a total of 14,500 in the new group. We’re told that there were 13,962 eligible to vote. Those numbers indicate that a clear majority of all eligible employees, not just those voting, were in favor of the CWA-IBT association.

Earlier Tuesday, the National Mediation Board said the Allied Pilots Association will represent about 15,000 American and US Airways pilots. Previously, it said the Association of Professional Flight Attendants would represent 24,000 American and US Airways flight attendants.

“With today’s election results, union representation for our three largest workgroups is now settled, and we will be working with each of those unions on joint collective bargaining agreements covering the combined employee groups,” American spokesman Paul Flaningan said in a statement.

“We have enjoyed a productive relationship with the CWA-IBT as well as our other unions and look forward to continuing our work together,” he said.

“We are honored to represent a total of more than 3,000 passenger service agents at the New American Airlines,” Teamsters airline division director David Bourne said the Teamsters’ announcement.

“The Teamsters are committed to providing American Airlines employees and our existing members at US Airways with strong representation as both airlines continue to integrate in this merger,” Bourne said.

In the CWA press release, Texas reservation agent Carroll Locklear said she has worked 18 years for American “and through all of those years I have been praying for this day.”

“We have been the odd employees out for so long, because we were the only employees without union representation. Gone are the days that management can take what want when they want. This will be a win-win for all of us,” said Locklear, a home-based agent.

AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka issued this statement (CWA is an AFL-CIO member):

“Today, thousands of workers embraced a union future. The hardworking men and women of American Airlines and US Airways voted for union representation and a legally binding contract. Their collective skill has built successful airlines, and their collective voice will build successful workplaces.

“It should not be lost on the pundits that most of the nearly 14,500 new union members work in southern states. The right to a voice at work doesn’t have a geographic predisposition, and this victory will energize ongoing organizing efforts in the South.

“I want to thank all parties involved, including elected officials, for enabling workers to have a free and fair election. And I especially want to congratulate CWA and the Teamsters on helping give these workers a voice.

“Clearly, one of the largest labor organizing victories in the South in decades is a historic day. But it also shows that the future of the U.S. labor movement is alive, as these workers can be found at airports, call centers, even working from home. The right to collectively bargain will always be what our working family fights for.”